#MarchforScience

#MarchforScience

April 20, 2017
Are science and activism compatible?

The March for Science is set to be held in Washington, DC on April 22, 2017.(http://ift.tt/2lbxsqy)

0 Shares

On Thursday, April 20 at 19:30 GMT:

This Saturday, on Earth Day, scientists will “walk out of their labs and into the streets” in a massive grassroots demonstration in Washington, DC. Sister marches are taking place in over 500 cities, and many are voicing their concern for the future of science under US President Donald Trump. Organisers of the rally are calling for evidence-based policies to be implemented by politicians, but while they insist the march “isn’t about any one politician — this is about science and policy, scientists and science supporters,” the genesis of the campaign is rooted in the US administration’s stance toward science.

President Trump’s proposed budget cuts across government agencies left the scientific community reeling. It includes massive cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Institute of Health (NIH), Health and Human Services, and many others. An executive order signed in March rolls back at least six of former President Obama’s executive orders that aimed to curb climate change. The president has appointed a climate change denier to head the EPA, he has called climate change a Chinese hoax, and has yet to appoint a top science adviser in his administration. It is unlikely that the proposed budget cuts will make it through Congress, but the administration’s stance toward the scientific community has led to unprecedented organising and online conversation.

The march has raised questions about the role of scientists in politics: when, if at all, should scientists become politically active and how can they maintain objectivity and credibility while doing so?  

Many scientists say when the ability to carry out their work is threatened, the time to stand on the sidelines is over. Politics and science have long intersected. “In the face of an alarming trend toward discrediting scientific consensus and restricting scientific discovery, we might ask instead: can we afford not to speak out in its defense? An ideology is considered to be just as valid as verified scientific evidence," Rush Holt, head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, told The Stream.

Critics say the march is anti-Trump and anti-Republican. They worry that organisers will not be able to control the message. Partisan issues aside, some scientists say there is a risk of being seen as an interest group, which could threaten objectivity and undermine the credibility of their work. Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist with the University of Chicago told The Stream, "at best the march is effective, at worst it harms the reputation of scientists and we are seen as a bunch of idealogues".

On Thursday, The Stream discusses the intersection of science and politics.   

Read more:

Yes, science is political – The Verge
Trump leaves science jobs vacant, troubling critics – The New York Times
Is the march for science bad for scientists? –  New Republic
@ScienceMarchDC: The Organizers – Undark Magazine

Should scientists be activists? Record a video comment or leave your thoughts in the comments below.

http://ift.tt/2oof0Jb Source: http://ift.tt/1VEirsY

Leave a Reply